Judge: Barking not protected speech

  • Thread starter Thread starter didymus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

didymus

Guest
UPI:
Judge: Barking not protected speech
Click to expand...
MASON, Ohio, July 24 (UPI) – A judge has ruled that barking and hissing are not protected by the First Amendment.
Mason, Ohio, Judge Andrew Batsche ruled Friday that when Ryan Stephens barked and hissed at a police dog in April, he was not protected by a constitutional right, The Cincinnati Inquirer reported.
Click to expand...
Stephens was petitioning for the dismissal of a charge that he had abused a police dog, claiming the law violates free speech and is too vague.
Jim Hardin, Stephens’ lawyer, argued that his client had a First Amendment right to bark at the dog, making reference to an Athens, Ohio, case in which a defendant had similar charges dropped.
Click to expand...
You know the lawyer begged this joker to just plead guilty and pay the fine.
 
The judge ruled only on the constitutionality of the charges, so the defendant still needs to face trial.
Ryan Stephens did not have a constitutional right to bark and hiss at a police dog last April, a municipal judge ruled Friday.
Click to expand...
That leaves Stephens to face possible trial on a charge of teasing the Mason K-9 Timber, with a possible penalty of 60 days in jail.
Click to expand...
news.cincinnati.com/article/20110722/NEWS01/107230322/Judge-Free-speech-doesn-t-include-barking?odyssey=nav|head
didymus said:
[You know the lawyer *begged
Click to expand...
this joker to just plead guilty and pay the fine.
I don’t think so. When the news about the case appeared back in April, his lawyer seemed eager to defend the constitutionality of barking at police dogs.
State legislators tried to fix the law against taunting police dogs after a case was thrown out on free speech issues for a man who barked at one in 2003.
Click to expand...
But, those revisions didn’t patch the constitutional hole, said the attorney for a Mason man charged with teasing a police K-9 because he woofed back at the dog in a cruiser on April 3.
Click to expand...
“The issue is … that he was doing nothing like striking the vehicle, striking the animal. It was simply barking,” attorney Jim Hardin said. “And, whether you consider that to be intelligent speech or not, it’s still speech.”
Click to expand...
communitypress.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20110421/NEWS010702/104220324/-Free-speech-will-argued-barking-case?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|communities|s

The lawyer has other arguments, but he wanted to try the constitutional angle first.
 
didymus said:
UPI:

You know the lawyer begged this joker to just plead guilty and pay the fine.
Click to expand...
Dale_M said:
I don’t think so. When the news about the case appeared back in April, his lawyer seemed eager to defend the constitutionality of barking at police dogs.
Click to expand...
I’m 99% certain that didymus was joking. 😛

You are barking up the wrong tree on this one, Dale. 😉
 
rlg94086 said:
I’m 99% certain that didymus was joking. 😛

You are barking up the wrong tree on this one, Dale. 😉
Click to expand...
Not joking.
My brother is a lawyer & spends a lot of time advising his clients that “having their day in court” is not a good idea and it’s in their interest to accept a plea bargain.

Unlike my bro’s clients Stephens has money and isn’t facing prison.
 
Is it just me or do others not wonder WTF were police doing by charging this man with barking at a police dog?

Talk about a police state!
 
didymus said:
Not joking.
My brother is a lawyer & spends a lot of time advising his clients that “having their day in court” is not a good idea and it’s in their interest to accept a plea bargain.

Unlike my bro’s clients Stephens has money and isn’t facing prison.
Click to expand...
My mistake. That’s why I left the 1% uncertainty. In that case, apologies to Dale, and her original response is valid. 👍
 
What a world we live in! Donating money to political candidates (which does not involve the vocal cords and the mouth) is considered speech, while holding a conversation with a canine in his own language (which does involve the vocal cords and mouth) is not.

Funny story – I was on a mass bike ride in Indiana, and we were passing a farmhouse where a furry yapper was having a field day chasing every biker that came by. When I got up to him, I sort of leaned over and gave my deepest “WOOF-WOOF-WOOF!!!” He tucked his tail between his legs and didn’t stop running until he was in the middle of his yard.
 
JMJSHJ said:
Is it just me or do others not wonder WTF were police doing by charging this man with barking at a police dog?

Talk about a police state!
Click to expand...
Nope not at all.

If he wants to act like an idiot he can, but he also has to deal with the natural consequences. He should thank God that in this case the natural consequence wasn’t coming teeth to body with the police dog. I’ll tell ya right now my German Shepherd is nothing to mess with. Don’t mess with the cops in fur coats.
 
Cider said:
Nope not at all.

If he wants to act like an idiot he can, but he also has to deal with the natural consequences. He should thank God that in this case the natural consequence wasn’t coming teeth to body with the police dog. I’ll tell ya right now my German Shepherd is nothing to mess with. Don’t mess with the cops in fur coats.
Click to expand...
Wooff!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top